Brewing giant Heineken’s advertising campaign promoting its zero-alcohol beer on the London Underground forced its way into the public conversation. By temporarily altering signs and renaming stops to things like Oxf0.0rd Circus and Waterl0.0, the 0.0 brand placed itself inside one of the UK’s most recognisable public institutions.
The Heineken stunt reflects a wider return of offline brand “activations” – when marketers look for the type of presence that can’t be scrolled past in crowded digital environments. These campaigns, from Netflix’s “experiences” to promote the new season of Stranger Things to live events like Red Bull’s Flugtag, which turn stunts into shareable spectacles.
The Dutch brewer’s campaign was designed to mark dry January; but whether the visibility translated into impact is another matter.
The reasoning behind it was clear. London Underground is famous for its unwritten rules – stand on the right, avoid eye contact and under no circumstances strike up a conversation with a stranger. But Heineken 0.0 attempted to turn it into a hub for connection, using its temporary rebranding of the Bakerloo line to encourage commuters to rediscover real-world socialising. Without alcohol, of course.
As part of the promotion, Heineken was also handing out free 0% beer at Waterloo station over a couple of days in January. The company said it hoped the move would encourage Tube users to make small talk with a stranger after its own data showed 63% of passengers said they were “very unlikely” ever to do this.
Younger generations are drinking less alcohol than their predecessors, and zero-alcohol products are increasingly in the public eye. Campaigns like the Heineken one show how non-alcoholic drinks can be marketed in ways that grab attention and remain culturally relevant.
My research into zero-alcohol marketing focuses on how brands use visual and textual strategies to communicate responsibility and reshape social norms around drinking.
But from that perspective, the Heineken 0.0 campaign reveals some notable shortcomings.
1. Accessibility
Heineken 0.0’s temporary rebranding drew criticism from disability advocates. Campaign group Transport for All warned that altering station names and navigation signage could create confusion for passengers, particularly those with visual impairments, learning disabilities, neurodivergence or fatigue.
Transport for London (TfL), which runs London Underground, pointed out that the changes were limited to certain platform signs and and assessed to ensure they didn’t negatively affect services, staff or customers. But nonetheless, critics hit back that even subtle rebranding risks turning routine journeys into stressful or unsafe experiences for vulnerable commuters.
2. Station mix-up
Heineken 0.0’s campaign for dry January included an unfortunate error: some signs displayed stations out of sequence. While the rebranding was intended as a playful stunt, the mistake risked confusing passengers who rely on accurate station information. TfL told The Conversation it was a printing error and that the signage was corrected, but apologised to customers for any confusion.
3. Implicit assumptions
Although the aim was to promote alcohol-free socialising, the campaign could inadvertently reinforce the idea that beer – or alcohol more broadly – is a prerequisite for connection. By pairing interaction on the Tube with the act of drinking, even a zero-alcohol beer, the campaign relies on familiar cultural tropes that link social environments with alcohol.
For commuters already wary of public interaction, this may undercut the message of inclusive, alcohol-free connection. The campaign’s playful intent is clear, but its execution subtly leans on entrenched assumptions about alcohol and sociability. This limits its potential to challenge norms.
4. Out of place
Heineken said its campaign was “playful” and meant to encourage socialising, but it feels out of step with the reality of commuting. Alcohol has been banned on TfL services since 2008, and most passengers are simply on their way to or from work, focused on their phones, schedules or morning coffee. They aren’t generally thinking about a beer, even when it is alcohol-free.
The activation makes a bold visual and social statement, but it doesn’t fully fit the context. A promotion tied to everyday routines, like coffee or snacks, would have felt more natural in this environment. The stunt sparks conversation, but the setting remains a mismatch.
Campaigns of this type should focus on settings that are actually designed for social connection. For example, a pop-up at a music festival or airport lounge could offer zero-alcohol tastings alongside prompts (so called because they gently cue participation and spark interaction without requiring commitment).
Prompts could include trivia games, mini challenges or small plates of food. These could even be curated to reflect the destination and create a memorable pre-flight experience – paired with a celebratory clink of 0.0 glasses, of course.
These experiences make interaction effortless and enjoyable, reinforcing the idea that socialising doesn’t require alcohol. By embedding responsibility, relevance and context into both strategy and execution, zero-alcohol campaigns can get people talking, while also making zero-alcohol socialising feel aspirational.
There’s no doubt that Heineken 0.0’s London Underground stunt grabbed attention, but the criticisms reveal how it could have been stronger. Accessibility must be central, ensuring that the campaign doesn’t obstruct, exclude or make everyday travel more difficult. And precision matters too. After all, mistakes only reflect badly on the brand.
Jonatan Sodergren does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
